I usually stay away from political posts. Emotions tend to run high. But on this occasion I’ve made an exception. In case you couldn’t guess, I’m a Republican. I’m fiscally conservative and socially moderate. I prefer lower taxes, cutting spending, pro Iraq war, but also pro choice and against the death penalty.
We are nearing the fifth year of the war. March 19, 2003 was the day cruise missles first hit Baghdad. Although I supported Bush and the decision to go to war, he and much of the rest of the administration deserve criticism for it’s management. It seems the only goal was to topple Sadaam and gain military control of the country. Great. Mission accomplished. Now what? They didn’t figure on nation building after the war and weren’t prepared for it.
Still, nation building is exactly what the US has been doing in Iraq. Democrats and republicans can argue over whether nation building is the just and moral thing to do, but that’s in the past. We are there now and will be for many years to come. Even if democrats gain control of the White House, we will maintain a significant military force there. We have done the same in nearly every country we have fought since WW II. We have 132,000 troops in Iraq but also another 100,000 in Europe and 35,000 in Japan. More elsewhere.
So when media types, liberals, and democrats shreik about “getting us out”. It rings hollow to me. It has been frustrating to see the carnage of suicide bombers coupled with the persistant chant “get our troops out”. All seems lost, at least that’s how it appears. Then there is the embarrasing conduct of a few idiots at Abu Ghraib. We get those photos over and over again. We also hear about indescriminate killing of civilians. We get body counts ad nauseum. Always negative, nothing positive. Nothing.
Then came talk of the “surge”. Bush wanted to send another 30,000 troops. The clamor was long and loud from liberals. Bush was not going to withdraw troops, no, he was doing the opposite, he was sending more! That was an incredible gamble on his part. A gamble with many lives at stake. We have a right to know the truth about that, about what has happened since the surge began.
Instead, hollywood pumps out war bashing movies such as “Redacted”, “Lions for Lambs”, "In the Valley of Elah", "Rendition," and "No End in Sight". Where is the counterpoint? When was the last time you saw a “positive” Iraq war movie or a documentary or even a 5 minute news segment? There isn’t any. Does hollywood and the leftist media expect us to believe there is nothing at all good happening in Iraq? Everyone knows there is always more than one point of view on any topic. Liberals blithely assume that shear repetition of a message will bring the majority of the public to their way of thinking. That’s an elitist mentality I find insulting.
It’s getting harder and harder to go and see a famous actor, regardless of the role, if they publicly voice their political views. But the masses are speaking because none of these films have done well at the box office.
Maybe the dumb masses know a thing or two.
So here we are. Twelve months after the surge began. And the result? Do you know? You can’t tell from the media. Where are all the Iraq stories so prevalent in print and on TV? There are none. There is no negative news nor is there positive news. The silence is deafening.
It seems to me there are many stories possible in the following facts. Stories about the positive side, the winning side of Iraq. Stories that beg to be told.
- 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq
- the Iraqi government currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people
- 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq
- Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating
- the Iraqi Navy is operational They have 5 -100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment.
- Iraq 's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons, which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night.
- Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion
- the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers
- there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks
- there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq. That includes 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.
- 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations
- 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October
- there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%
- Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations
- Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004
- 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a televised debate recently.
Much more at the following reference web sites:
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/
www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rpt/iraqstatus/
http://www.mnstci.iraq.centcom.mil/
http://www.defense.gov/ http://www.defendamerica.mil/iraq.html
http://www.jcs.mil/
8 comments:
Gostei muito desse post e seu blog é muito interessante, vou passar por aqui sempre =) Depois dá uma passada lá no meu site, que é sobre o CresceNet, espero que goste. O endereço dele é http://www.provedorcrescenet.com . Um abraço.
Hola, yo no entiendo su idioma. Aparece ser español. Utilicé un software de la traducción del idioma para escribir este comentario. Anuncie por favor en inglés para un diálogo significativo. gracias, Paul
Hello, I do not understand your language. Appears to be in Spanish. I utilized software to translate the language to write this comment. Please announce in English for a meaningful dialogue. Thanks, Paul
Minhas desculpa para supor sua linguagem como espanhol. Depois que mais pesquiso vejo que é português. É bem-vindo colocar comentários qualquer hora. Visitarei seu local. Paul
Great summary!!!
The one part that really baffles me is the part where you said:
"It rings hollow to me. It has been frustrating to see the carnage of suicide bombers coupled with the persistant chant “get our troops out”. All seems lost, at least that’s how it appears.
Then there is the embarrasing conduct of a few idiots at Abu Ghraib. We get those photos over and over again. We also hear about indescriminate killing of civilians. We get body counts ad nauseum."
Who does all those media & liberal idiots think are doing the protesting? Who do they think are "against" us being in Iraq? Who would speak the loudest? the people that are wanting to destroy the USA not Iraq. Who kills more than the USA every week? suicide bombers!! USA is trying to do good, a suicide bomber does NO good but they take that bombing like it is the USA's fault that person strapped on a bomb and blew themselves and other people up. Suddenly the person that strapped on the bomb, (because their family gets paid $25,000), blew some people up. He/she becomes a hero among their supporters and the USA is to blame. I do not get it.
When are the USA people going to WAKE UP and see what the media and 1/2 of their government is doing to them.
The USA government it selling out the USA country and jobs and people are worried about something in Iraq that should have been done years ago.
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!! PROTECT YOUR PEOPLE SERVING AND GIVING THEIR LIFE FOR YOUR COUNTRY WHILE THE GOVERNMENT IS GIVING IT AWAY.
WAKE UP!!!!
Wow has it only been 5 years that we've been in Iraq? I thought it was longer because I clearly remember being in LA on our way to Hawaii for our wedding when Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" on that aircraft carrier in San Diego. That was May, 2003, which would have only been a couple months after we went in? I guess I thought it had been at least year before he declared the fighting over.
I agree, I don't think whoever the next president is, is going to get us out anytime soon. But that's what the people want to hear...
Regarding the actors sharing their political views - why is it alright for you to post your political beliefs on your blog but it's not alright for actors to be public with theirs? Personally, if I had as much at stake as they did, I would probably keep my mouth shut, unless I just had so much money that I didn't give a crap. But it's their choice, it really doesn't matter to me, if the movie is good - I'll probably watch it. I tend not to think too much about politics when I go to or rent a movie. Music's the same way. For example, Springsteen's new album is really good. There's nothing really too political on it (maybe one song - which is about the war) but I imagine he's burnt some bridges with his Republican fans who will never hear it. Which is a shame cause it's a pretty good cd, and they're not really hurting Springsteen by not buying it. I don't know you're listening preferences, but wouldn't you agree that some of the best music that came out of the 60's & 70's was inspired by Vietnam or at least created by musicians who were publicly against that war?
Bush didn’t declare the fighting over. He was declaring completion of the mission goal of toppling Hussein and removing him from power. “Mission Accomplished” referred to the ground war and our defeat of Sadaam’s Republican Guard. Here’s an excerpt from Bush’s speech:
“Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.”
That was a big accomplishment at the time. From then on the fight changed to an internal struggle with terrorists. A change from war between established governments to one of guerrilla warfare with terrorists. And that was my point. The administration was terrific at the declared goal of removing Sadaam from power. But they were not prepared for the transition to guerrilla warfare. They severely underestimated post war reconciliation. That level of incompetence should have had consequences much sooner. Rumsfeld especially.
My disagreement with the actors is not regarding their right to voice their opinion. My argument is with the imbalance in presenting information to the public. Both fiction and non fiction. The public is best served if all points of view are represented on a topic, then we will all be in a better position to formulate informed opinions. And that’s always a good thing.
But in Hollywood, their opinions are monolithic in opposition to republicans in general, and Bush in particular. Hatred of Bush prevents discussion of the positive things happening in Iraq. Let alone any films about it. And the truth is, there are positive things happening. Those few actors who are conservative are forced to remain quiet otherwise risk their careers. Sounds like McCarthyism to me. So when the public is presented with movies that are uniform in message and only about military incompetence, failure, negativity, hatred, the public is not served. I’m not saying that there hasn’t been rogue elements in the military who do bad things. All I’m saying is I’d like to see the positive side put on the Screen for a change. But those in Hollywood can’t afford to risk presenting that side.
I agree that some of the best music is born of anger and especially sorrow. That’s what the Blues are all about. People can buy whatever CD’s they like. Or not buy CD’s by a particular artist if they disagree with the politics of that artist. That’s a personal decision. To me, if a celebrity is especially hateful and public about their politics, I can’t help but be reminded of their hatred while watching them on screen, that’s no way to enjoy a film. So I’d rather skip the actor’s performance.
"That level of incompetence should have had consequences much sooner. Rumsfeld especially. " - I agree.
I guess I don't notice Hollywood being so one-sided as much as you do. Heck, most those movies you mentioned, I'd never heard of. I don't know if I could tell you that many actors political beliefs. I guess Rosie O'Donnell who I can't stand, I don't anybody who likes her anyway and I don't think she's much of a force in Hollywood to begin with. That other girl on that show is way extreme the other way, Elizabeth Hasselbeck I think is her name. I know Oprah's a democrat and obviously supports Obama. I see Chuck Norris on TV every time Mike Huckabee is speaking so I know what he's about. Michael J. Fox is pro- stem cell research, I know that. But most of these actors aren't really people anybody gives a shit about anyway, except Oprah. Of course, Springsteen, Bon Jovi and Bono are all Democrat supporters as well. But other than that, I honestly couldn't tell you about anyone else. I guess you could argue that the movie studios, newspapers and media outlets are the ones behind it all. But isn't Rupert Murdoch buying all them up anyway? I do notice Fox News being one-sided. I don't watch the network news (except 60 Minutes), so I really couldn't say about them. I do watch CNN, which you probably think is too left leaning.
If you really start looking at the media you will notice the bias if you are honest with yourself.
You’ve not heard of most of the movies I listed because they all did poorly at the box office despite having marquee stars like Tom Cruise, Robert Redford, Meryl Streep, Brian DePalma, Susan Sarandon, Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron, Reese Witherspoon, and Jason Patric.
I believe they did poorly because the public is tired of all the negativity and also all the false representations. All of the films I listed were made within the last 2 years and all are negative portrayals about the war including torture and soldier rape of civilians.
Republicans are universally portrayed negative and Democrats portrayed positive. When was the last movie you saw that portrayed Republicans in a positive light? I can’t think of one.
Almost all movies about presidents portray Democrats as strong presidential characters, while Republicans are portrayed as greedy, dirty, unethical, or as Bible thumping bafoons. Remember “An American President”, “Dave”, “Wag the Dog”, or the “West Wing” TV show.
I’m sure liberals everywhere can’t wait till the new film “Bush” comes out directed by Oliver Stone. Stone has been vocal about his hatred of Bush and yet we are to believe the movie will be “fair”. Please.
I’m just asking for a little balance, but I won’t hold my breath.
Regarding news outlets, I think CNN is mostly middle of the rode with a lean to the left. Fox leans to the right. Others like MSNBC are decidedly far left.
Post a Comment